Eighteen and a half years ago, during the state of emergency under the quasi-military rule of Fakhruddin Ahmed and Moeen U Ahmed, I wrote an opinion piece in a national daily titled “Why Tarique Rahman is Their Target.” At the time, an orchestrated campaign was underway in certain newspapers and TV channels against Tarique Rahman, then Senior Joint Secretary General of the BNP and now its Acting Chairman. Although the public was astonished by the smear attempts, few dared to speak out, fearful of persecution by the caretaker regime. Speaking up often led to being summoned for a “tea invitation”—a euphemism for interrogation whose true flavour only the summoned knew.
Back then, I was Assistant Editor of Dinkal, widely regarded as the BNP’s mouthpiece. Having observed Tarique Rahman closely, I felt compelled to respond to the vilification he was facing. The state of emergency had been declared on 11 January 2007, and my article was published on 19 February in Dinkal. It may well have been the first published piece defending Tarique Rahman post-1/11. In that article, I argued: “If one looks at Bangladesh’s political history, one sees a pattern: leaders who have shown unwavering commitment to the nation’s sovereignty and to defending democracy have consistently been made targets by vested quarters. Tarique Rahman is no exception.”
Many warned me that I might face persecution for writing that piece. Some advised caution. I was neither afraid nor deterred. I went on to write several more articles in support of Begum Khaleda Zia and Tarique Rahman during their incarceration. The challenges I faced for doing so, and how I overcame them, are stories for another day.
Reading the headline “Tarique Rahman Targeted” in the lead report of Bangladesh Pratidin on 15 July brought back those memories. The report observed that his growing political maturity, foresight, and ability to take timely decisions had won public confidence—traits that have made him the target of envious quarters.
BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir told the newspaper, “A vested group has dared to engage in character assassination of Tarique Rahman. A calculated smear campaign is underway against the BNP, aiming squarely at its Acting Chairman.”
According to the report, BNP leaders believe a faction threatened by Tarique Rahman’s popularity has resorted to conspiracies. Unable to confront him through electoral means, undemocratic forces have taken to discrediting him. Although no names were mentioned, it is not difficult to surmise who stands to benefit from such efforts—those who see him as an obstacle to their path to power.
This isn’t the first time Tarique Rahman has been subjected to an organised campaign of defamation. During 2001–2006 and under the 1/11 regime, similar forces, emboldened by their foreign patrons, tried to discredit him to weaken nationalist political currents in Bangladesh. History shows us that nationalist leaders in developing countries often become targets once they gain mass popularity. The first step of such attacks is always character assassination—fabricating stories to destroy credibility. Tarique Rahman faced precisely that treatment before and after 1/11.
To understand the roots of this, we must look back further. During the three and a half years of Awami League rule post-independence, Bangladesh’s sovereignty was far from absolute. The overbearing influence of a powerful neighbour left the country in a quasi-colonial state. Even a charismatic leader like Sheikh Mujibur Rahman struggled to maintain independence in decision-making.
Some believe that his participation in the 1974 Islamic Summit in Lahore without the prior approval of that neighbouring power irked them deeply. There are theories that this displeasure contributed to his assassination in August 1975. The subsequent people-soldier revolution of November that year brought General Ziaur Rahman—proclaimer of Bangladesh’s independence—into the national spotlight. He famously declared, “We have friends abroad, but no masters.” His defiance of foreign dominance made him a marked man. On 30 May 1981, he was assassinated by disgruntled military officers.
After Zia’s death, Khaleda Zia took up the mantle of nationalist leadership. Despite the rule of General Ershad—widely considered a second-choice by those same external forces—Khaleda led a sustained nine-year movement for democracy, culminating in BNP’s victory in the 1991 general elections. Her rise did not please certain foreign powers, whose proxies reportedly said, “We won’t let this government stay in peace for a moment.” Their attempts to destabilise her government were visible throughout her term.
In 2001, the BNP-led four-party alliance again swept to power. Tarique Rahman, though not then holding a senior party post, played a key role in leading the campaign. His effective organisational skills made him well-known across the country. In June 2002, he was appointed Senior Joint Secretary General, and between then and 2006, he spearheaded efforts to build grassroots party structures. It became clear that he was being prepared to take up the leadership mantle from his mother.
That is when the smear campaign against him intensified. Both domestic agents and foreign patrons of the old order took to discrediting him, fearing the continuity of nationalist politics.
Of course, like any political leader, Tarique Rahman may have made mistakes. I myself, after stepping down from party-affiliated journalism and assuming a neutral editorial role, have criticised some of his decisions. And I would do so again if warranted. But nothing justifies the vulgar, indecent slogans recently shouted against him on the streets by members of a rival political party. Civilised people do not stoop to such indecency—but the uncivilised do so effortlessly.
So who are Tarique Rahman’s new adversaries? Some may think it is merely an election strategy by power-hungry rivals. But in my view, it runs deeper. He is the son of Ziaur Rahman—declarer of independence and a celebrated freedom fighter—and he commands substantial public support within nationalist circles.
Post the 2024 mass uprising, there appears to be a concerted effort to rewrite Bangladesh’s constitutional identity, national anthem, and history. Tarique Rahman stands as a bulwark against this. As the flagbearer of nationalist politics, he is likely to resist any such attempts—and that is precisely why he has been made the target.
I am not presumptuous enough to offer advice to him. But I would like to remind him of what former Chinese President Zhao Ziyang told him during a visit to China in 2002: “You carry two flags—one of your father, the other of your mother. Try to keep both flying high.”
Today, he holds a third flag: the flag of nationalism. If he can hold it aloft, he may yet be recognised as a true defender of Bangladesh’s independence and sovereignty.
The writer is a journalist and political analyst
